Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-6342 is a critical-severity OS Command Injection (CWE-78) vulnerability in Zyxel Nas326 Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 20% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
The vulnerability CVE-2024-6342 is an OS command injection issue, tracked as CWE-78, in the export-cgi program of Zyxel NAS326 firmware versions through V5.21(AAZF.18)C0 and NAS542 firmware versions through V5.21(ABAG.15)C0. The finding is marked unsupported when assigned and received a CVSS v3.1 score of 9.8.
An unauthenticated remote attacker can exploit the flaw by submitting a crafted HTTP POST request, enabling execution of arbitrary operating system commands and resulting in full control over the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the affected NAS device.
The referenced Zyxel security advisory addresses the command injection vulnerability in these NAS products and outlines mitigation steps for the listed firmware versions. The associated EPSS score has remained flat at 0.0660 with no material increase observed after disclosure.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-47455
Vulnerability Data
**UNSUPPORTED WHEN ASSIGNED** A command injection vulnerability in the export-cgi program of Zyxel NAS326 firmware versions through V5.21(AAZF.18)C0 and NAS542 firmware versions through V5.21(ABAG.15)C0 could allow an unauthenticated attacker to execute some operating system (OS) commands by sending a crafted…
more
HTTP POST request.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.5V1.2.8V15.2.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing or incorrect command sanitization during development.
Input validation directly neutralizes or rejects special characters that would otherwise alter OS command structure.
Least privilege reduces the permissions available to any process that could be subverted by injected commands.
Least functionality restricts available OS commands and interpreters, limiting the blast radius of injection.
Secure engineering principles require proper neutralization of untrusted input before command construction.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
PR.PS-06's SDLC practices directly require secure coding and input handling that blocks command-injection defects, yet the single broad outcome leaves many specific neutralization vectors and verification gaps unaddressed.
Routine patching/maintenance can remediate known command-injection CVEs in dependencies (partial forward) but does nothing to stop developers from introducing improper neutralization in custom code (none reverse).
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing and code review target insecure use of operating-system command interfaces, catching command-injection flaws introduced during development.